7/7 London Bombings

sure they exist
as I just stated
(and referenced right from the whoreses mouth too

)
but they are the arm of US and western banker foriegn diplomacy
just ask one of thier principle creators and to this day: bosses
Zbiggy Bryzynski
you know carters man
he also brags about the creation and running of Pol Pot if you would like to know what he has planned for you

Originally posted by maxella1
They all agree that official conspiracy theory is nonsense, and make up their own conspiracy theories. Maybe if the government wasn’t covering up
and actually tried to investigate there would not be so many theories.

And stop picking on the leprechauns.

This is such a lucid statement that nothing I can say can improve it, so I'll just post what you said again:

"They all agree that official conspiracy theory is nonsense, and make up their own conspiracy theories. Maybe if the government wasn’t covering up
and actually tried to investigate there would not be so many theories."

It's a given that nobody wants to admit when they made a mistake, particularly if it's a mistake that caused people to get killed. That's not to say
there was malicious intent, as someone watching a radar screen may have legitimate reasons to think blip A was a hijacked plane and notified
interceptors to head in that direction when the hijacked plane was actually blip B heading in the opposite direction...but it's still a mistake and
the one who made the mistake will still instinctively want to conceal it. When someone conceals their mistake it creates a vacuum, and because nature
abhors a vacuum it quickly gets filled with speculation, which in turn opens the door to crackpots like Alex Jones and con artists like Richard Gage.
Of course, all this is just a lengthy explanation of what you just said. A star for your post.

...and why shouldn't I mention the leprechauns? Are you a sinister secret agent working with the leprechauns to take over the world? I'm on to you

Fort Leonard Wood Public Affairs director Tiffany Wood has provided the first official response to the shocking U.S. Army document that outlines
the implementation of re-education camps, admitting that the manual was “not intended for public release” and claiming that its provisions only
apply outside the United States, a contention completely disproved by the language contained in the document itself.

Yes you are right, we had already invaded Iraq (illegally) I`d like to know the reason why also.
Iraq? isnt that were the british army stormed a prison and freed 2 SAS types? Dressed in arab clothing, with a car full of explosives. They even shot
some of the police, who tried to question them. Lies is all we seem to get from these public servants. Its about time we had a revolution here in
the UK. Get rid of these `we are all in it togeather` tossers.
7/7 without a doubt was a false flag, the reason why is another story.

It's a given that nobody wants to admit when they made a mistake, particularly if it's a mistake that caused people to get killed. That's
not to say there was malicious intent, as someone watching a radar screen may have legitimate reasons to think blip A was a hijacked plane and
notified interceptors to head in that direction when the hijacked plane was actually blip B heading in the opposite direction...but it's still a
mistake and the one who made the mistake will still instinctively want to conceal it. When someone conceals their mistake it creates a vacuum, and
because nature abhors a vacuum it quickly gets filled with speculation, which in turn opens the door to crackpots like Alex Jones and con artists like
Richard Gage. Of course, all this is just a lengthy explanation of what you just said. A star for your post.

That is definitely true and I agree with you that mistakes made on 9/11 were not all malicious.

The difference between you and I is that you think you know what were the mistakes.

I think all we know is that mistakes were made and since they successfully covered up their mistakes, I don't know if it was accomplished with help
from our government or not. And when people get away with such mistakes they will make them again.

Even if the mistakes are not malicious, people who made them should be identified and dealt with the same way that a bus driver who fell asleep behind
the wheel and killed people would be dealt with.

9/11 was the reason for wars that killed so many people and we still don't know what actually happened prior to 9/11 and on 9/11.

...and why shouldn't I mention the leprechauns? Are you a sinister secret agent working with the leprechauns to take over the world? I'm on to you

Leprechauns are generally loners who have no intention of harming humans. They’re kind of like deer, however. They’re nice to look at, but leave
the poor things alone! On the other hand, there are a few slightly more outgoing leprechauns who have gladly adopted human families.

Originally posted by Danbones
I notice you didn't go anywhere near the document
DAVE ALERT DING DING DING DONG

Of course I didn't go anywhere near this document. The document was produced by a raving lunatic painting himself up like the Joker and throwing
papers around, who was yelling (and I quote) "HA HA HA THE JOKE'S ON THEM HA HA AH IT'S GETTING WARM IN HERE" while knowing full well he was on
camera.

This isn't simply just "religious whacko in a toga carrying a sign saying the world is about to end" kind of crazy. This is "John Lennon being
gunned down by someone thinking he's reading hidden messages in a J.D. Salinger book'" kind of crazy. If, out of the entire internet world of
millions of websites and blogs that you need to resort to referencing THAT guy to substanciate your claims, then your claims are by definition utterly
worthless. What part of "HA HA HA THE JOKE'S ON THEM HA HA AH IT'S GETTING WARM IN HERE" convinced you that this guy knows what's really going
on in the world, exactly?

More to the point, when I say that you conspiracy theorists are simply being suckered by the paranoid drivel you're getting off those damned fool
conspiracy websites, how does it prove I'm wrong?

Originally posted by maxella1
That is definitely true and I agree with you that mistakes made on 9/11 were not all malicious.

The difference between you and I is that you think you know what were the mistakes.

Ummm, no I don't. This is why I support the idea of having further investigations. I just don't want these investigations to be hijacked by
crackpots like Alex Jones and con artists like Richard Gage. Heck, the odds that we'll ever actually have any further investigations is about zero
specifically because the term "further investigations" has become synonymous with lasers from outer space and hologram planes.

I think all we know is that mistakes were made and since they successfully covered up their mistakes, I don't know if it was accomplished with
help from our government or not. And when people get away with such mistakes they will make them again.

Even if the mistakes are not malicious, people who made them should be identified and dealt with the same way that a bus driver who fell asleep behind
the wheel and killed people would be dealt with.

9/11 was the reason for wars that killed so many people and we still don't know what actually happened prior to 9/11 and on 9/11.

I agree, and in fact I will even add to the list- the invasion of Iraq, the first preemptive attack the US has ever made in our nations' entire
history, all based upon bad intelligence reports on WMD. The gov't simply shrugged and passed it off with a "whoops! Well, what can you do?" and
something like that must not happen again. As in ever.

Of course, THAT won't be investigated because the people who want to find our more about the reasons for the war in Iraq are being drowned out by
people demanding we investigate those secret cults of Satan worshipping numerologists that blew up the WTC because it looked like a giant number
eleven. Even now, when an al Qaida courier was arrested in Vienna and was found carrying documents proving Al Qaida was behind the 7/7 bombing they
still can't give up their sinister secret government plots. Without even asking, I know it's because they think the al Qaida documents are
sinister secret gov't disinformation.

Leprechauns are generally loners who have no intention of harming humans. They’re kind of like deer, however. They’re nice to look at, but leave
the poor things alone! On the other hand, there are a few slightly more outgoing leprechauns who have gladly adopted human families.

That's just leprechaun disinformation. If leprechauns were evil and wanted to take over the world would they ever be honest about their intentions?

Originally posted by maxella1
Didn't mean to derail this thread. Lets continue on 7/7, I never looked in to it as much as 9/11.

P.S. Don't mess with leprechauns. The came in peace.

Umm, not sure what's left to say. An Al Qaida courier was arrested in Vienna and was found carrying documents proving that Al Qaida was behind the
7/7 attack, and the conspiracy proponents are insisting it's disinformation planted by sinister secret agents and that everyone who thinks otherwise
is just making stuff off the top of their head and refusing to face the facts.

Other than the leprechauns possibly murdering Barry Jennings to cover up the existence of Leprechauns, it's business as usual here in conspiracy
world.

Get some new material Dave, baby Jesus cries everytime you type this same reply over and over...

Of COURSE I use this as a reply to anyone posting the abject paranoia that Alex Jones is putting out. The reason why should be obvious, particularly
when you yourself are noting I've used this to reply to a lot of OTHER people posting the abject paranoia that Alex Jones is putting out.

alciaduh is a world wide conspiracy theory the only proof we have that alCIAduh exists is the US governmnets admitance to the creation of it
Hillary Clinton Admits the U.S. Government Created al-Qaeda Video Posted May 08, 2012

Errr care to point out where exactly in that video Hillary Clinton explicitly states that the American government created Al-Qa’ida because it
sounds like to me she is discussing operation Cyclone. At no point in that video does she say the American Government created Al-Qa’ida that is just
conspiracy spin.

Mr Giuliani was in the City as the Underground system was evacuated and roads were closed in a rush of emergency vehicles and evacuations. A bomb
on a Tube train between nearby Aldgate and Moorgate killed seven people and injured dozens. "As we were walking through and driving through the
streets of the city, it was remarkable how the people of London responded calmly and bravely," said Mr Giuliani.

Originally posted by CaptainAmerica2012
The fact that this thread got no replies is proof that something was suspect.

Now with this forum being sponsored by MSNBC and the like you can count your lucky charms there are people employed to muddy the lake of
truth.

Thus, the entire rationale for these conspiracy stories right there- no matter what happened, or what roads any research or evidence lead us to, it's
always going to be consciously steered towards the insistence there are armies of sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the
world.

Never mind that Islamic fundamentalists and insurgents have been planting bombs all over the place for years. Never mind that England has had
assasinations and bombing attacks all over the place from the IRA long before that, even decades before most of the countries in the mideast even
existed. Never mind that an Al Qaida courier was arrested in Vienna and was found carrying al Qaida documents proving they were behind the 7/7
bombing. NOPE NOPE NOPE it's gotta be the work of armies of sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the world. Claiming that
someone planting a bomb in a subway is impossible for terrorists to do can't just simply be too much of a stretch even for the 9/11 conspiracy
theorists to waste their time commenting on. NOPE NOPE NOPE the lack of any responses just has to be the work of armies of sinister secret agents
working on an evil plot to take over the world. Of course, now that I'm posting here they'll turn around and insist the thread is being invaded by
armies of sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the world.

The abject paranoia that there are all these armies of sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the world is the entire reason why
they go to those damned fool conspiracy websites to begin with. They want someone to reinforce their perceptions of a world where armies of sinister
secret agents are working on an evil plot to take over the world so they'll go to characters like Alex Jones who specifically preach about armies of
sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the world. Characters like Alex Jones are almost certainly the ones who put the idea of
the 7/7 attack being staged by armies of sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the world in these people's heads to begin
with.

Please, explain to me how having an overbearing need to believe in these armies of sinister secret agents working on an evil plot to take over the
world is any different from having an overbearing need to believe there's some invisible guy living in the clouds who'll randomly reward us with
free magical gifts if we pray to him long enough, 'cause to me this is faith based logic either way.

What a surprise to see you in the 7/7 threads dave! So not only are you an expert on 9/11, you're now an expert on 7/7 as well!

You love to say tht people think there are 'sinister secret agents' even though they never mention such a thing.

You use that term in pretty much every thread you comment on! In fact you used the word 'sinister' 9 time alone in your 1st post in this thread, and
5 times in your 2nd reply in this thread, that 14 times just in your first 2 posts in this thread! I can see an obvious 'theme' to your replies.

Why do you overuse the term 'sinister' and 'sinister secret agents' when no one else in the thread even mentions anything of such a thing?!
Strange at best!

Absolutely, but only if you address them with a certain preconceived evidential procedure. Take the example above, of 'terrorists' apparently shot in
Canary Wharf. It is almost inconceivable that the police would be able to cover this up - it's one of the busiest areas of London. If you think they
could then you have to ask why they didn't similarly conceal the de Menezes shooting later. The only logical answer is that they wanted you to know
about the Stockwell killing, which makes no sense at all, since it was a disaster for them. The obvious conclusion is that the docklands reports were
erroneous.

The only way to believe that they weren't is to

- assume the existence of a power that acts illogically but with inhuman efficiency
- assume that every report made erroneously that conforms with a conspiracist viewpoint is real; that official sources are axiomatically untrustworthy
unless they say what you want;
- and thus those sources are simultaneously infallible and fallible

It's why you see conspiracists running into trouble when they use the 9/11 report or news evidence. In their excitement they forget that they have
already disqualified this evidence. It is also a completely faith-based and circular form of reasoning, impervious to logic. If the mind has been made
up then anything that refutes the conspiracy can be automatically disregarded while anything that corroborates it is by definition beyond reproach.

Hi trickoftheshade, I see you, sam kent, alfie, and good old dave are all experts on 9/11 & 7/7 too now!

Funny I should come across you all here too! There seems to be a theme developing! You use the term 'they' like 'them & us' you're not very subtle!

This is a conspiracy theory website, you seem so serious about towards people that talk of 'conspiracy theories'!?! Why would you even be on a
conspiracy theory site if you have zero interest in conspiracy theories?
Seems rather strange?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.